Pregnancy · Early Pregnancy

Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages

Carpentier PA, Stanford JB, Boyle PC

Published March 11, 2016 The New England Journal of Medicine, 374(9), 894
DOI 10.1056/NEJMc1600491 PMID 26962922
Read our synopsis

In response to A Randomized Trial of Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages (Coomarasamy A et al., 2015)

RRM Academy Synopsis

Progesterone Timing Debate Follows Miscarriage Trial Results

This is a letter and reply about the PROMISE trial. The trial tested progesterone for women with repeat miscarriage of no known cause. Almost a third of screened women had fertility problems. They were left out of the trial. Progesterone began only after implantation. The trial authors say they tested current practice. They did not test earlier treatment timing.

Key Findings

  • PROMISE trial screening excluded 515 of 1568 women (nearly 33%) because of fertility problems. So its findings speak mainly to women who got pregnant without treatment.
  • In PROMISE, progesterone was started after implantation was confirmed, a pattern the letter's authors say differs from typical fertility-treatment protocols that start earlier.
  • The trial authors state women who did not conceive naturally within one year after enrollment were ineligible for randomization, confirming women with fertility problems were excluded.
  • The trial authors say no accepted histologic, biochemical, proteomic, or genomic test currently exists to identify luteal-phase defect, calling a short cycle only a crude marker.
  • The trial authors agree that testing progesterone during the luteal phase in unexplained recurrent miscarriage is an important question requiring further research.

Interpretation

This is expert commentary: a letter about the PROMISE trial, plus the trial authors' reply. PROMISE tested progesterone in the first trimester for women with unexplained repeat miscarriage who got pregnant without fertility treatment. Women with fertility problems were left out. Progesterone started only after implantation. The letter argues these design choices limit what PROMISE can say about earlier progesterone, given before or at implantation. The trial authors agree this question needs more research. They say there is no accepted way to diagnose luteal-phase defect, and call a short cycle only a rough marker of it. Neither piece reports new outcome data.

RRM Context

Two of the letter's authors work with the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine. This group trains doctors to time progesterone to a woman's own cycle. The timing is tied to ovulation and implantation. Their letter reflects that idea: cycle-timed progesterone may work differently than progesterone timed to a pregnancy test. PROMISE did not test that timing question. The exchange does not answer it either.

Abstract not indexed.

Topics

By this author

Related research

Pregnancy › Early Pregnancy › Progesterone Support · Reproductive Endocrinology › Ovarian Hormones › Progesterone · Therapeutics › Hormonal Agents › Progesterone and Progestins
Phil C Boyle, Paul A Carpentier, Joseph B Stanford
Philip Boyle, Phillip Boyle, P Boyle, P Carpentier, Joe Stanford, Joey Stanford, J Stanford
PMID 26962922 26962922 DOI 10.1056/NEJMc1600491 10.1056/NEJMc1600491 Carpentier et al. 2016, Carpentier 2016

Cite this article

Carpentier, P. A., Stanford, J. B., & Boyle, P. C. (2016). Progesterone in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages. The New England Journal of Medicine, 374(9), 894. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1600491